Quote:
Originally posted by Overpaid Slacker
Island -- few who have studied the art of rhetoric, evidently.
|
Grammar, too.
Quote:
Rather, the camp that has no principled argument and makes ad hominem attacks against the proponents of a contrary view for want of ability to attack the view itself has gone into "thermonuclear, preclude debate and smear the other side mode."
JP [/B]
|
You know the truth, and don't follow it? When the question is "Public art.....is it good for us?" the answer clearly cannot be "public art is gubmint subsidy for artists." I mean, if someone responded "No, public art is not useful to us, and it only is gubmint subsidy for artists," then that person would have answered the question AND hurled hatred at a group to which they don't belong.....a double-score.
At any rate, I was hoping to get a sense for who is so myopic in their thinking that they believe art is always just a useless waste of money. Of course, I knew I would be reminded of who is blinded by hate and selfishness but will not offer solutions, nor even comment on the actual issues. And no, I'm not thinking of anyone in particular, whoever you are that feels a personal insult there. It's just so obvious that some folks consider these questions with some chin-scratching, going "hmmmmm" and gazing in thought at the ceiling (those would be the libs) and there are those whose answer is ready even before the question is laid out.
"Gubmint is a WITCH. BURN IT. BURN IT!"